[ QUOTE ]
Probably not. They probably would've included that in Posi's screenshots if it was possible. It's still...technically possible, but considering that this "power customisation" will be tied to the character creator (where else would it go?), then I fully expect one tint for the entire set. With a lot of sets left out, too.
Still, might be nice to make my Fire/Ice Blaster have green fire and white(r) ice, so I'm happy it's coming. I'm just pragmatic regarding results.
[/ QUOTE ]
I was about to launch into a speech about how that level of customization largely excludes melee sets without weapons, sets with model projecticles like spines, etc, but then I realized such sets are in the minority so there's really no point.
Bananas are likely here to stay, SS Punch will likely never be a punch, sadly and throwing cars will have to wait until CoH 2.
.
For what it's worth, your version of thor, as a brute, will save the world and quash gang uprisings and generally be a good guy.
Maybe I'm being too positive, but I have a hard time believing that they would invest as much time in power customization as they would have to (for tinting) and only end up with some tinting abilities for players. Why you wouldn't want to go in there and give a lot of options is a bit silly... they know we like it from the costume creator and have been recently reminded of it with the Mission Architect.
Of course, they could say I16 is the start of power customization and say tinting is just the beginning. *shrugs* However, I would say they'd be silly not to have a large amount to choose from at the start, like they did with weapon customization.
Guide: Tanking, Wall of Fire Style (Updated for I19!), and the Four Rules of Tanking
Story Arc: Belated Justice, #88003
Synopsis: Explore the fine line between justice and vengeance as you help a hero of Talos Island bring his friend's murderer to justice.
Grey Pilgrim: Fire/Fire Tanker (50), Victory
Well, it IS something we've been asking for for a very long time. Maybe it's something they started working on years ago. If that's the case, it might well be more than just tinting powers. From my perspective, though, that would be a godsend all on its own. I'm tired of my Tankers and Scrappers glowing like christmas trees.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've never found this to truly be the case. Yes, a team might not Want the second tanker, but frequently the second tanker IS valuable. There are many many rooms with several groups easily aggrod but not close enough to keep taunted easily. The second tank is very useful there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Definitely. Multiple Tanks can also pull those groups together to wipe them out with AoEs even quicker. Or you can split up the team to speed up a defeat all mission.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with these tactics being possible on most of the missions, although they can work.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know what to tell you. I've seen it, many times. Tankers are often more reliable than controllers for mob positioning and aggro management. Especially with controllers who think mostly about their own damage output.
Regarding adding a third tank, I mostly don't want 3 of any AT on my teams. But I'd rather have 3 tanks than multiple fire/kins who don't remember to speed boost the team and mostly worry about FSing their imps.
Wavicle, Energy/Energy Blaster, dinged 50 in Issue 4, summer of 2005.
@Wavicle, mostly on the Justice server.
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately this is often, even usually, not an option.
When making my own version of Thor, I probably would have liked to make him a Brute, but I couldn't, because that's a villain. With no other hero class capable of Super Strength, I'm forced to play a Tanker.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a different issue. Ask for the devs to speed up Side-Switching and/or Power Proliferation.
[ QUOTE ]
When creating Ultimo, who should be a very tough hero with blasts, I'm forced to play either a Blaster or Defender when I'd rather be playing a Tanker, or even a Scrapper.
[/ QUOTE ]
I understand this problem, but the game as its balanced now just doesn't allow it, and even if it did there would probably be other balancing factors you didn't like.
That said, some Defender combos can be pretty defensive, and Blasters are much cooler now since the Defiance revamp.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've never found this to truly be the case. Yes, a team might not Want the second tanker, but frequently the second tanker IS valuable. There are many many rooms with several groups easily aggrod but not close enough to keep taunted easily. The second tank is very useful there.
[/ QUOTE ]
Definitely. Multiple Tanks can also pull those groups together to wipe them out with AoEs even quicker. Or you can split up the team to speed up a defeat all mission.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't agree with these tactics being possible on most of the missions, although they can work.
[/ QUOTE ]
I don't know what to tell you. I've seen it, many times. Tankers are often more reliable than controllers for mob positioning and aggro management.
[/ QUOTE ]
Im not saying the tanker can not do that, but its very very rare that I see a situation like this where one single tank would not had been able to handle the aggro management on his own.
[ QUOTE ]
Regarding adding a third tank, I mostly don't want 3 of any AT on my teams. But I'd rather have 3 tanks than multiple fire/kins who don't remember to speed boost the team and mostly worry about FSing their imps.
[/ QUOTE ]
Off course, i also would rather have 3 players that know how to do their job than 3 players that don't, but thats not the point. We talking about having decent or good players behind those keyboards. Player skill is irrelevant as the idiot can be behind the keyboard of the tanker or the troller. In fact, relying on a bad tanker can be way more dangerous than relying on a bad controller.
[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
I've never found this to truly be the case. Yes, a team might not Want the second tanker, but frequently the second tanker IS valuable. There are many many rooms with several groups easily aggrod but not close enough to keep taunted easily. The second tank is very useful there.
Definitely. Multiple Tanks can also pull those groups together to wipe them out with AoEs even quicker. Or you can split up the team to speed up a defeat all mission.
Or you can just go all Tanks and be a rolling ball of destruction.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think what this post touches on is an inherent flaw in the behavior of the player community not the archetype. Multiple Tankers on the team can be useful if the team adapts their tactics to utilize them. Teams with multiple tankers are capable of splitting their forces and steam rolling, but when was the last time you saw a PUG do this. Tankers are capable of it but team tactics and management seems to be coming up short. The development team when considering whether an AT is in need of rebalancing has to consider both median performance and peak performance. Since some Tanks are able to tank 8 man spawns supported by a 3 man team, Tankers must be balanced towards this extreme of performance.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That same developer also admitted that increasing tanker damage to compensate was a mistake as well.
[/ QUOTE ]
Did he now?
And what quote would that be?
I'm remembering the interview where he sought a modifier increase for Tankers but was told that couldn't happen. We don't know if any thought was put into special mechanics or temporary damage increases. Circiumstances are different now anyways, and what was unacceptable before might be possible now.
Once upon a time, infinite respecs, cross factional teaming and flashbacks weren't possible or were things that were argued shouldn't be done. Things change. I don't think it's out of the question to re-examine Tankers.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
You know JB, if tankers were to deal even more dmg than they already do now, the recharge for their attacks would need to be multiplied by like 10 to make sure they cant have any attack chain. They would be one-hit wonders. Bruisers that could one-shot bosses but then would have to wait quite awhile before dealing another hit.
And why that? Because tankers should take more time defeating foes than blasters or scrappers do. Simply because we can already see what a Tanker with a fast attack chain dealing heavy damage while never being in danger is JUST PLAIN BROKEN. It is already abnormal that tankers can wade into packs of deep purple +4 bosses and survive on their own like forever. At least they have a hard time killing the bosses, it is time-consuming ( not always mind you ) and i guess THAT is what makes the AT balanced in the end.
Many tankers are competing with scrappers on live servers while having better hps and better survivability. Raising even further Tanker's damage without penalizing them elsewhere would be totally unbalanced.
I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Voltaire
On a slightly related note, my experience of tankers is that they are super badass when built right and played aggressively. Furthermore, I've been seeing a TON of tankers on Justice lately.
Wavicle, Energy/Energy Blaster, dinged 50 in Issue 4, summer of 2005.
@Wavicle, mostly on the Justice server.
The only way I think this argument would ever be resolved would be to introduce stances as a Tank only inherent (I think Stars came up with the idea once, though borrowed from WOW).
Defensive: Everything is as we have it now.
Offensive: Scale the damage modifier to just below scrapper levels, lower Res and Def cap to balance the increased Offensive ability. Adds Critical hits that scale a bit below a Scrapper.
Switching can be done on the fly, but shares a similar long animation to a self teleport and detoggles you.
This would let you pick your role based on the needs of the team. It would also boost the solo capability of tank.
[ QUOTE ]
The only way I think this argument would ever be resolved would be to introduce stances as a Tank only inherent (I think Stars came up with the idea once, though borrowed from WOW).
Defensive: Everything is as we have it now.
Offensive: Scale the damage modifier to just below scrapper levels, lower Res and Def cap to balance the increased Offensive ability. Adds Critical hits that scale a bit below a Scrapper.
Switching can be done on the fly, but shares a similar long animation to a self teleport and detoggles you.
This would let you pick your role based on the needs of the team. It would also boost the solo capability of tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why play a Scrapper when Tankers can turn into Scrappers?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only way I think this argument would ever be resolved would be to introduce stances as a Tank only inherent (I think Stars came up with the idea once, though borrowed from WOW).
Defensive: Everything is as we have it now.
Offensive: Scale the damage modifier to just below scrapper levels, lower Res and Def cap to balance the increased Offensive ability. Adds Critical hits that scale a bit below a Scrapper.
Switching can be done on the fly, but shares a similar long animation to a self teleport and detoggles you.
This would let you pick your role based on the needs of the team. It would also boost the solo capability of tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why play a Scrapper when Tankers can turn into Scrappers?
[/ QUOTE ]
QFT
As has been proven over and over in this game, players will take the path of least resistance. There's also the scrapper and brute backlash to consider. How long before scrappers and brutes start asking for their own version of stances that allows them to switch to a heavy defense mode from time to time? Or simply seeing scrapper and brute damage raised yet again to balance against the new offensive stance of the tanker which puts us right back here.
[ QUOTE ]
I think a Competition/Opposition buff effect that is applied as a tanker attacks would be great. Say for the first attack in melee the tanker and all teammates within a certain radius of the tanker (large enough to keep squishies outside of AoE splash damage) get a 120 second defense buff. The buff power would then have a cool down period of 110 to 115 seconds before being available again. This would mean that in extended battles the buff remains in place as long as the tanker is still attacking.
Fix it so that buffs from the same tanker will not stack but those from multiple tankers will. The code for this already exists somewhere in the game so it shouldn't be too difficult.
Here's a nod to Johnny, allow Competition/Opposition to afford solo tanks a built in Assault buff (say 12%) that switches to Maneuvers when teamed. This way the mechanic would help tankers both in teams and out as well as be indicative of how their strategy changes for each situation. On a team they hold back because someone might get hurt, that someone being one of their teammates, but solo they can really let go and hang the collateral damage.
-
Or....
-
Slightly increase the damage for higher end attacks (ST or AoE or both) but remove their Gauntlet effect. Then increase the number of foes effected by Gauntlet for the Tier 1 through Tier 3 attacks and keep a slight endurance build up for Tier 1 and 2 attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
You know JB, if tankers were to deal even more dmg than they already do now, the recharge for their attacks would need to be multiplied by like 10 to make sure they cant have any attack chain.
[/ QUOTE ]
Untrue. As much as I disagree with JB there certainly is enough room to pump tanker damage while retaining balance if that is what the devs determine they want to do to the AT to "improve" it
There are tanker issues, I listed them above, there are many ways tankers can go from there though. General ideas that can work are:
<ul type="square">[*]Endurance discounts or increase (to make the AT more durable not only in HP but also in how long it can actually keep up fighting)[*]Tanfendering via Leadership-like buffs to make multiple tanks more desirable in teams[*]Tankfendering via Reverse-Bodyguard mechanic[*]Tanktrolling by making taunt inherent and replacing it with a control power (or damage for the sets like Ice Melee and Stone that already got AoE control)[*]And off course, plainly more damage while making sure it does not step into scrapper territory[/list]
Tankers have issues, after all, nothing is perfect, but the issues are not insignificant. They are not AT breakers either, though.
<ul type="square">[*]Tankers face an impending hurdle with the upcoming expansion as their role gets stepped uppon by two different Archetypes that may do just as well.[*]Tankers face team stack-ability issues, they are the worst stackers this game has to offer in teams. Other than extreme situational cases, second tankers are just slowdown.[*]In solo play tanker face a complexity of issues that may be subtle and hard to percieve, specially if you don't play multiple ATs. My attempt at summarizing them:
-Low damage modifier means they kill slower.
-Off course, killing so much slower is never fun.
-Slower killing means they fight the same foe longer but is not given the endurance to fight longer
-Some sets (this is very set specific) may have high recharge powers with great DPAS that allows them to build for high offense but this also means they are burning endurance even faster. An "offensive" tanker is extremely handicapped in the endurance department.
-Even if "offensive building" was looked at, this is at the set level and not AT wide.[/list]
This issues are not made up, it's not something I came up because I had nothing better to do or because I want god mode. These are real issues that may be why the AT is at the bottom of the popularity numbers.
Incidentally, I know it's kinda weird for me of all people to be pointing to the topic drift, but I think it's worth underscoring that this thread, from Ultimo, is about the idea of adding ranged attacks to tankers, which I'm against because it diminishes the distinction between ATs, because it gives more survivability to an AT that doesn't need it, because it's tricky to implement and because I can't see what the game really gains from it.
In this strand of topic drift, we're discussing JB's favourite bugaboo of 'Tankers Need Moar Damage' where he tries to rearrange the order of the words and hope we don't notice, which prompts me to remember something I did the last time this happened. I was playing my non-IO'd shield/ss tanker, in Crey's Folly, and thought I'd see how 'slowly' I defeated enemies. Not 'how much slower than a scrapper', but how much actual time it took me to kill things. With fairly standard slotting, no hasten, no recharge in attacks,
The normal tactic of this character is to leap into a +0 spawn and shield charge them and then kill the lieutenant that was still standing. Since getting Foot Stomp, it's become leap in, Foot Stomp, Shield Charge, one-shot the remaining lieutenant. I do this primarily because it's fun and it makes me giggle to watch a large pack of freaks drop all at once. However, that's not really all that clear - after all, shield charge takes time to recharge, so I can't do it every single spawn. I alternate by bashing faces of lone or paired bosses in the area. Plus 'the activation time of two attacks' isn't really meaningful data for this little curiosity of mine.
I waited until Rage was ready to go, then clicked it and closed in on the a trio of red (+1) freakshow tanks and just laid into them. Between that point and the crash of Rage, I killed all three bosses, killed one that had rezzed, and was halfway through killing the next that had rezzed. So in 90 seconds, that's 4.5 bosses. 20 seconds for a +1 boss.
How much faster do I have to be before it's good enough? Twenty [censored] seconds.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Damage numbers are just a game mechanic, they don't reflect concept or power levels.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah but they do. They are our feedback as players as to the power level trying to be conveyed.
That is why "weaker" attacks generally deal less damage and more powerful ones deal higher damage.
That is why more powerful enemies deal higher damage then grunts.
Damage is also how enemies are defeated. Ability to defeat enemies and the effort and time it takes you greatly influence how powerful a character is perceived. How am I to feel powerful about a Tanker who takes much more time to defeat a Boss or EB than a Scrapper or Brute who take less time, when all three ATs can stand up to said Boss's/EB's attacks?
Damage may not precisely equal power level in this game, but the two are far from strangers.
.
[/ QUOTE ]
As I've stated before this is indicative of an issue that needs to be addressed with the game system as a whole rather than with an individual archetype. Holds and debuffs should be on equal footing with damage when it comes to defeating foes rather than just adjuncts that make dealing damage easier.
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
The only way I think this argument would ever be resolved would be to introduce stances as a Tank only inherent (I think Stars came up with the idea once, though borrowed from WOW).
[/ QUOTE ]
It's an idea that has been proposed many times and it's used on more than just WoW. Final Fantasy XI has it. Heck they have it on a sub job system meaning anyone can have the stance by having warrior as a sub job. No one bothers with defensive, though, not even the tank (they need damage to do aggro not good to loose damage.)
Although I'm fond of the concept, though, I always noted it may step on the Kheledian's ground.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only way I think this argument would ever be resolved would be to introduce stances as a Tank only inherent (I think Stars came up with the idea once, though borrowed from WOW).
Defensive: Everything is as we have it now.
Offensive: Scale the damage modifier to just below scrapper levels, lower Res and Def cap to balance the increased Offensive ability. Adds Critical hits that scale a bit below a Scrapper.
Switching can be done on the fly, but shares a similar long animation to a self teleport and detoggles you.
This would let you pick your role based on the needs of the team. It would also boost the solo capability of tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why play a Scrapper when Tankers can turn into Scrappers?
[/ QUOTE ]
My full proposal for mode switching fills it with penalties, like not being able to switch really on the fly, it being a click that forces you into the mode for a predefined period of time that may be longer than desired, not being able to switch mid fight and scrapper mode being severely weaker than scrapper in survivability but and do no criticals, just the equivalent of 1.05 melee damage (scrappers doing 1.125 without criticals.)
So the scrapper would still be superior but the tanker gets to adapt to an offensive role if needed. I had reactions that ranged from "Why play a scrapper?" to "Why bother with that and not just roll a scrapper?" that made me think the penalties were just right.
[ QUOTE ]
which I'm against because it diminishes the distinction between ATs
[/ QUOTE ]
This may get the text changed before the AT but still:
[ QUOTE ]
The Tanker is an irresistible force combined with an immovable object. This Archetype can take and dish out all sorts of damage.
The Tanker is not totally invulnerable, but his skills allow the other Archetypes to play their parts, too. The Tanker is a devastating hand to hand combatant, and ranks second only to the Scrapper in sheer melee power. He possesses some ranged abilities, though far below those of the Blaster or the Defender.
Tankers proudly stand in the front lines of battle in order to protect their comrades and, of course, the innocent.
Hit Points: High
Damage: Medium
Primary Power Category - Defense
Secondary Power Category - Melee
[/ QUOTE ]
Note that ranged thing? But where is the range? Odd no? Been there 5 years and I personally never seen people ask where the range is at unless they roll SS and take Epics.
Not that range will do anything to improve the AT but still odd.
Now do not the damage.
The highest damage in game are scrappers (modifier wise) with about 1.181 ds with crits against minnions.
The lowest is defenders with .65 (doms may go lower but there is containment to pump them up)
Now, this means .5 is the low end, or zero.
This would make tanker's .8 a .3 and scrappers a .68
Relatively speaking:
Defender: 15%
Controller: 0% (without pets, without containment)
Controller: 50% (without pets, with containment)
Tanker: 30%
Scrapper/Blaster (ranged): 100%
Seems a Petless controller is the true medium damage and tanker is Low. That's not even getting into complexities of controller secondaries and pets, off course.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The only way I think this argument would ever be resolved would be to introduce stances as a Tank only inherent (I think Stars came up with the idea once, though borrowed from WOW).
Defensive: Everything is as we have it now.
Offensive: Scale the damage modifier to just below scrapper levels, lower Res and Def cap to balance the increased Offensive ability. Adds Critical hits that scale a bit below a Scrapper.
Switching can be done on the fly, but shares a similar long animation to a self teleport and detoggles you.
This would let you pick your role based on the needs of the team. It would also boost the solo capability of tank.
[/ QUOTE ]
Why play a Scrapper when Tankers can turn into Scrappers?
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
just below scrapper levels
[/ QUOTE ]
Scrappers would still be on top for pure damage. The balance point could be in the cap penalties for switching the stance, bringing your numbers below a Scrapper while moving you close in offense.
The one problem I really seed with thanks is the redundancy on teams. The way CoX has evolved the presence of more than one tank on a team rarely adds much. There are situations where many tanks can be a benefit, but they are more the exception than the rule.
Allowing the tank to focus their strength into offense and act as an off-tank while bringing more respectable damage to the table could fill in some of the gaps.
As to "How long until X starts screaming?"....who cares? Balance points of an AT should not be dependent on the vocal response of a separate AT. Lets focus on Tanks first...being that this is the Tanker forum.
[ QUOTE ]
Incidentally, I know it's kinda weird for me of all people to be pointing to the topic drift, but I think it's worth underscoring that this thread, from Ultimo, is about the idea of adding ranged attacks to tankers, which I'm against because it diminishes the distinction between ATs, because it gives more survivability to an AT that doesn't need it, because it's tricky to implement and because I can't see what the game really gains from it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed, ranged attacks are their own form of defense. Adding them to an archetype that already possesses superior defense is overkill and invalidates the other archetypes in the game.
[ QUOTE ]
I think a Competition/Opposition buff effect that is applied as a tanker attacks would be great. Say for the first attack in melee the tanker and all teammates within a certain radius of the tanker (large enough to keep squishies outside of AoE splash damage) get a 120 second defense buff. The buff power would then have a cool down period of 110 to 115 seconds before being available again. This would mean that in extended battles the buff remains in place as long as the tanker is still attacking.
Fix it so that buffs from the same tanker will not stack but those from multiple tankers will. The code for this already exists somewhere in the game so it shouldn't be too difficult.
Here's a nod to Johnny, allow Competition/Opposition to afford solo tanks a built in Assault buff (say 12%) that switches to Maneuvers when teamed. This way the mechanic would help tankers both in teams and out as well as be indicative of how their strategy changes for each situation. On a team they hold back because someone might get hurt, that someone being one of their teammates, but solo they can really let go and hang the collateral damage.
-
Or....
-
Slightly increase the damage for higher end attacks (ST or AoE or both) but remove their Gauntlet effect. Then increase the number of foes effected by Gauntlet for the Tier 1 through Tier 3 attacks and keep a slight endurance build up for Tier 1 and 2 attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
[ QUOTE ]
Agreed, ranged attacks are their own form of defense. Adding them to an archetype that already possesses superior defense is overkill and invalidates the other archetypes in the game.
[/ QUOTE ]
Nerf Hurl and Epic pools!!!
[ QUOTE ]
As to "How long until X starts screaming?"....who cares? Balance points of an AT should not be dependent on the vocal response of a separate AT. Lets focus on Tanks first...being that this is the Tanker forum.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's a question of balance but not balancing in a vacuum. Allowing tankers to become part time scrappers makes them the melee archetype of choice in every case. You get the best of both worlds in every mission and task force. Sure scrappers are pure damage but they can't keep the aggro off the squishies and they aren't much help in an over-aggro situation. Not like a tanker with an offensive and defensive mode that can change as the situation demands.
Furthermore the whole argument of tanker offense is based on the fact that we are not really focusing on tankers in the first place. We're being forced to look at other archetypes and being told that is who we should be emulating. The argument for increasing tanker damage in any way shape or form has been based solely on the fact that scrappers and brutes have more damage potential than tankers.
[ QUOTE ]
I think a Competition/Opposition buff effect that is applied as a tanker attacks would be great. Say for the first attack in melee the tanker and all teammates within a certain radius of the tanker (large enough to keep squishies outside of AoE splash damage) get a 120 second defense buff. The buff power would then have a cool down period of 110 to 115 seconds before being available again. This would mean that in extended battles the buff remains in place as long as the tanker is still attacking.
Fix it so that buffs from the same tanker will not stack but those from multiple tankers will. The code for this already exists somewhere in the game so it shouldn't be too difficult.
Here's a nod to Johnny, allow Competition/Opposition to afford solo tanks a built in Assault buff (say 12%) that switches to Maneuvers when teamed. This way the mechanic would help tankers both in teams and out as well as be indicative of how their strategy changes for each situation. On a team they hold back because someone might get hurt, that someone being one of their teammates, but solo they can really let go and hang the collateral damage.
-
Or....
-
Slightly increase the damage for higher end attacks (ST or AoE or both) but remove their Gauntlet effect. Then increase the number of foes effected by Gauntlet for the Tier 1 through Tier 3 attacks and keep a slight endurance build up for Tier 1 and 2 attacks.
[/ QUOTE ]
"I am a Tank. I am your first choice, I am your last hope." -- Rune Bull
"Durability is the quintessential super-power. " -- Sailboat
The weird thing is, Mc, because you're repeating that in an odd colour, I'm finding it really easy to not read. O.o
[ QUOTE ]
Simple- play a Scrapper or Brute. Tankers aren't for everyone. They shine best in a team situation and you've stated time and time again you have no interest in that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately this is often, even usually, not an option.
When making my own version of Thor, I probably would have liked to make him a Brute, but I couldn't, because that's a villain. With no other hero class capable of Super Strength, I'm forced to play a Tanker.
When creating Ultimo, who should be a very tough hero with blasts, I'm forced to play either a Blaster or Defender when I'd rather be playing a Tanker, or even a Scrapper.